Intel Xeon E-2134 vs Intel Xeon E3-1285 v6 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E3-1285 v6 and the Intel Xeon E-2134 are both 4-core, 8-thread server/workstation processors built for the Intel Socket 1151 platform, but they come from different architectural generations and exhibit distinct performance characteristics. The E3-1285 v6, a Kaby Lake-DT part from mid-2017, consistently edges out the E-2134, a Coffee Lake-S WS part from mid-2018, across every Cinebench benchmark recorded, with margins ranging from 0.9% to 1.3%. While neither chip holds a dominant lead, the data shows a clear, if narrow, pattern of superiority for the older E3-1285 v6 in this head-to-head comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher base clock speed?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1285 v6 has a base clock of 4.10 GHz, compared to the 3.50 GHz base clock of the Intel Xeon E-2134. Both processors share the same 4.50 GHz boost clock.

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in multi-core performance?

A: The E3-1285 v6 wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests. It scores 818 vs 808 in R15, 3409 vs 3367 in R20, and 8119 vs 8018 in R23. The deltaPct in each case is between 1.2% and 1.3% in favor of the E3-1285 v6.

Q: Are the integrated graphics different between the two models?

A: Yes. The E3-1285 v6 features Intel HD Graphics P630, while the E-2134 features Intel UHD Graphics P630. Both are integrated graphics solutions on the same Socket 1151 platform.

Q: What is the difference in their average benchmark scores?

A: The E3-1285 v6 has an average benchmark score of 2348, while the E-2134 has an average score of 2319. This puts the E3-1285 v6 about 1.2% ahead in this aggregate metric.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1285 v6 has a TDP of 79 watts, while the Intel Xeon E-2134 has a lower TDP of 71 watts. This makes the E-2134 the more power-efficient part on paper.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v6 and the Intel Xeon E-2134 support ECC memory, which is a key requirement for their server/workstation market segment.

Architecture Differences

The two processors belong to different Intel microarchitectures, which is the primary source of their differential behavior. The E3-1285 v6 is based on the Kaby Lake architecture, specifically the Kaby Lake-DT codename, while the E-2134 is based on the Coffee Lake architecture, with the Coffee Lake-S WS codename. Both are built on the same 14 nm process node at Intel’s foundry, so the architectural changes are the main differentiator rather than a process shrink.

The E3-1285 v6 integrates 1,400 million transistors on a die size of 160 mm². The E-2134’s transistor count is not listed, but its die size is smaller at 126 mm². This difference in die size suggests a more compact implementation for the Coffee Lake part, though the performance data indicates that the larger Kaby Lake die does not translate into a disadvantage in these tests.

Cache hierarchies are identical: both offer 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The core and thread counts are also the same at 4 cores and 8 threads. The integrated graphics differ, with the E3-1285 v6 using HD Graphics P630 and the E-2134 using UHD Graphics P630, though no specific graphics benchmarks are provided to quantify any performance gap between them.

The E-2134 carries a memory bandwidth figure of 42.7 GB/s, a specification that is not listed for the E3-1285 v6. Both support DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The release dates show the E3-1285 v6 arriving on 2017-07-31, while the E-2134 followed nearly a year later on 2018-07-11, making the E-2134 the newer part despite its lower performance in this comparison.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E3-1285 v6 wins in every single benchmark recorded in the head-to-head data. This includes all six Cinebench tests, covering both single-core and multi-core workloads across the R15, R20, and R23 versions. The E3-1285 v6 also holds a higher average benchmark score of 2348 against the E-2134’s 2319.

The E-2134 does not win any of the six head-to-head benchmarks. However, it does have a lower TDP of 71 watts compared to the E3-1285 v6’s 79 watts, which could make it a more attractive option for thermally constrained environments or systems where power draw is a priority. Its smaller die size of 126 mm² also suggests a more compact physical footprint, though both processors use the same Intel Socket 1151.

For workloads that rely on single-threaded performance, the E3-1285 v6 again takes the lead, albeit by a narrow margin. Its single-core Cinebench scores are 115, 481, and 1146 in R15, R20, and R23 respectively, compared to the E-2134’s 114, 475, and 1132. The consistent pattern of wins across different benchmark versions reinforces that the E3-1285 v6 has a slight but reliable performance advantage in both single and multi-threaded scenarios.

Specification Differences

The two processors share many core specifications, but several fields show clear differences. The base clock is the most significant gap: the E3-1285 v6 runs at 4.10 GHz, while the E-2134 runs at 3.50 GHz. Both have the same 4.50 GHz boost clock, meaning the E3-1285 v6 has a higher minimum operating frequency.

TDP differs, with the E3-1285 v6 rated at 79 watts and the E-2134 at 71 watts. The architecture and codename differ as well, with Kaby Lake-DT versus Coffee Lake-S WS. The die size is 160 mm² for the E3-1285 v6 and 126 mm² for the E-2134, and the transistor count is listed for the E3-1285 v6 at 1,400 million, while the E-2134’s count is not provided.

The integrated graphics models are different: HD Graphics P630 on the E3-1285 v6 versus UHD Graphics P630 on the E-2134. The release dates are also distinct, with the E3-1285 v6 launching on 2017-07-31 and the E-2134 on 2018-07-11. The E-2134 has a listed launch MSRP of $256, while the E3-1285 v6 has no launch MSRP in the data. Memory bandwidth is only specified for the E-2134 at 42.7 GB/s. The production status also differs, with the E-2134 marked as end-of-life, while the E3-1285 v6’s status is not listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data shows a clean sweep for the E3-1285 v6 across all six Cinebench tests, with the largest wins coming in the multi-core categories. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the E3-1285 v6 scores 818 against the E-2134’s 808, a delta of 1.2%. The single-core R15 test shows a smaller gap of 0.9%, with scores of 115 and 114.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the E3-1285 v6 extends its multi-core lead to 1.2%, scoring 3409 versus 3367. The single-core R20 result shows the biggest relative margin of the entire comparison at 1.3%, with the E3-1285 v6 scoring 481 against 475. In Cinebench R23, the multi-core test again shows a 1.3% delta, with scores of 8119 and 8018, while the single-core test shows a 1.2% delta, with scores of 1146 and 1132.

The pattern is remarkably consistent. Every single benchmark, regardless of the Cinebench version or whether it tests single or multi-core performance, lands in the same narrow range of 0.9% to 1.3% in favor of the E3-1285 v6. This uniformity suggests that the performance difference is systemic rather than workload-specific, likely stemming from the higher base clock of the E3-1285 v6. The average benchmark scores reinforce this, with the E3-1285 v6 at 2348 and the E-2134 at 2319.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v6 is the faster processor in this comparison. It wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests and has a higher average benchmark score of 2348 versus 2319 for the E-2134. The margins are small but consistent, ranging from 0.9% to 1.3%, which points to a reliable performance advantage for the Kaby Lake part.

Users who prioritize maximum compute performance in single or multi-threaded workloads should choose the E3-1285 v6. The data shows it is ahead in every measured category, and its higher base clock of 4.10 GHz gives it a structural advantage over the E-2134’s 3.50 GHz base clock. The E3-1285 v6 also holds a strong position among its nearest rivals, with a deltaPct of -0.3 against the Intel Core i5-9600 and -1.1 against the Intel Xeon E-2234.

The Intel Xeon E-2134 is only preferable in scenarios where the lower TDP of 71 watts is a deciding factor, as it draws less power than the E3-1285 v6’s 79 watts. It also carries a launch MSRP of $256, which may be a consideration for buyers, though its end-of-life production status could affect availability. The E-2134’s nearest rival data shows it nearly matches the AMD Ryzen 7 2700 with a deltaPct of -0.1, indicating it is still a competitive part in its own right. However, in a direct comparison, the E3-1285 v6 is the clear winner based on the benchmark results.